Women in sinking scenes of camerons film and miniseries

S

sharon rutman

Guest
Well, as long as its open season let's look at more dubious female moments from our favorite Titanic flicks, shall we????? I especially love those striptease scenes which have become a staple of the genre. How about Molly Brown stripping down to her corsets in the Unsinkable Molly Brown. And of course let's not forget Rose who spurns Cal's advances but can't wait to bare the naked truth to Jack twice--posing for her portrait and in the back seat of the car.

Hey, I wonder among the guys who has the better body -- Jack or Cal??? Wouldn't it be nice it the guys stripped down to their skivvies or bared their naked truth for a change.
 
Dec 2, 2000
58,590
379
283
Easley South Carolina
>>Well, as long as its open season let's look at more dubious female moments from our favorite Titanic flicks, shall we????? <<

Be my guest. I don't see anyone defending these scenes or even saying that they like them. Movies tend to be remarkable studies in bad taste, but I'm not going to get worked up about it. Life is waaaaaaayyyyyy to short to go looking for reasons to be offended.

>>Hey, I wonder among the guys who has the better body -- Jack or Cal??? <<

Scratch your curiousity to your heart's content. Since guys are not to my taste, I'll pass on that. Thanks anyway.
 
S

sharon rutman

Guest
That question was for ladies only. Sheesh!!!! It sure would be nice to have the tables turned around for once. Gender is irrevelant? You've got to be kidding me, right. I just passed my english comprehensive exam by doing a feminist critique on A Night To Remember.
 
Dec 2, 2000
58,590
379
283
Easley South Carolina
>>That question was for ladies only. Sheesh!!!! <<

Since this is a public access message board, the question is fair game for any member who takes an interest.

>>Gender is irrevelant? You've got to be kidding me, right.<<

No.

I could care less how anybody's anatomy is plumbed. I'm interested in the grey matter between the ears. The stuff that counts comes from there.
 
Apr 12, 2006
33
0
76
I think you both should stop. First of all, I don't like the striptease, I think it is demeaning and insulting to women. And it is a public message board, so anyone can write a response to the question.
 
S

sashka pozzetti

Guest
Hollywood films about the Titanic exploit lots of clichees, so that lots of people will go and see the film. I don't think anyone can deny that. I don't think that should be mixed up with a debate about women's contribution to Titanic research. One thing I do know is that several women passengers have generated more interest than their male partners, Lucile for one! AND she didn't endorse the wearing of tight corsets either!
 
Jul 12, 2003
500
1
86
Sasha, I think I am lost on what your point is. What cliches are you talking about and how do they relate to people going to see the film? How do corsets relate to your point? I'm confused.
 
S

sashka pozzetti

Guest
If you look above there are examples of how women are represented in a clicheed way in films. They always seem to need to take their clothes off, scream hysterically etc. But this is to do with most Hollywood films not just Titanic films.

Then there is a debate about women involved in Titanic research, that is a completely different thing and I don't think the sexist portrayal of women in films is particularly relevant to this.
 
Jul 12, 2003
500
1
86
I believe I understand what you were trying to say now, Sasha, in relation to the things you are referring to as cliches.

But, I don't believe that their inclusion is the reason people will go see the films. Speaking for myself, I certainly don't base a desire to see a film on them.
 
S

sashka pozzetti

Guest
I don't go and see films because of the clicheed portrayal of women, as it is boring, and in my opinion uneccessary. Unfortunately for a lot of people it is all part of what they want to see, which is why the un-necessary scene of Rose naked on a sofa made it into the screen version, not just the DVD out-takes! every bit of the film will have been analysed to death to make sure it appealed to as many people as possible, and if not, cut. It was a commercial film, not an art film. Like you I saw the film as a whole package, and generally it was very entertaining. It had some very good parts to compensate for the bad. It wasn't all sexist, and at least Rose is not a complete pushover, and there is an attempt to indicate that womens roles were changing at the time. It would have been great to see a version without sexism, but there is always a next time!
 
Jul 12, 2003
500
1
86
But, if a person has no knowledge as to what is in a film (such as Rose on the sofa or any other scene for that matter), then of course, you can't say it is the reason someone is seeing the film. I honestly don't know a soul who wanted to see the film just to see Rose on the sofa. If someone were to spend $10 to see a film because of that scene, then maybe that person should get a life.

As for the film editing, it is a matter of making the story flow not about how many people the inclusion of a scene would appeal to. If that were the case, you have to decide what people we are talking about, what age groups are you aiming for, who will be offended or not offended, etc.
 
Dec 2, 2000
58,590
379
283
Easley South Carolina
>>Actually 45 percent fewer women went into the lifeboats than planned.<<

What plan?

One of the problems that night was that there was no plan which accounted for the need to evacuate the ship in the middle of the night with no immidiate rescue in sight. They had to work things out as they went.
 
Jun 12, 2004
2,131
0
106
Mike,

I think Rena was referring to the "Women and Children First/Only" policy. Somewhere along the line those that wound up in the boats were more men than expected in comparison to the women, where the intended percentage would have greatly favored the W&C. Does that make sense?
 
Dec 2, 2000
58,590
379
283
Easley South Carolina
>>I think Rena was referring to the "Women and Children First/Only" policy. <<

Perhaps but that was pretty much an on-the-spot decision made in extremis. With an inadaquate number of boats for all the people aboard, and no rescue in sight, their options were woefully slim.
 
Dec 6, 2000
1,480
3
166
Rena is still using that http://www.squidoo.com/Harland-and-Wolffs-Titanic/ web-site. Overall out of the 546 women & children onboard 389 survived. That equals 71.25%, with 28.75% lost. So how you can get 45% less than planned when the loss rate was not that great I have no idea. Just counting the women gives 75.34% saved and 24.66% lost.
In passing I note the web-site refers to: "8:50 am: The 'Carpathia' leaves the area bound for New York. She carries 705 survivors." - We know that is wrong.
 
Dec 6, 2000
1,480
3
166
On reflection 45% represents the approximate difference between the British Inquiry figures of saved Adult females 316 and saved children 57 = 373 and the estimate of the number of women & children in the lifeboats. - 704. - On the page giving 704, a saved figure of 394 women & children is given.
373 is 53% and 394 is 55.97% of 704.
http://www.titanicinquiry.org/BOTInq/BOTReport/BOTRepSaved.php
http://www.titanicinquiry.org/BOTInq/BOTReport/BOTRepBoats.php

If the number saved is being compared with wildly inaccurate Lifeboat survivor estimates then use of the word "planned" is totally inappropriate. There were not even 704 women & children on Titanic.
 
May 27, 2007
3,916
3
0
quote:

The 3rd class just never "Got the word" that there was a problem much less what to do.
Third Class was neglected to death plain and simple with only that self serving lout Hart to see to their welfare. Left to die also sounds right if a tad harsh. The fact still remains the more First Class men survived then Third Class children. I think Cameron still managed to capture the a bit of the confusion the Third Class immigrants went though when he shows Rose and Jack passing those poor middle eastern immigrants trying to decipher the signs on the wall.​
 

Bob Godfrey

Member
Nov 22, 2002
6,046
57
208
UK
Nothing's plain and simple, George. John Hart wasn't perhaps the hero he is sometimes made out to be, but a self-serving lout?? And he wasn't the only crew member with a duty to look after the welfare of the 3rd Class passengers. There were 47 stewards in that department. Too few to cope with the needs of so many in extraordinary circumstances, but a lot of them died trying. Read the personal accounts of 3rd Class survivors and you'll find plenty that testify to that.

Confusion about signs on the wall probably wasn't much of a factor on the night of the sinking. The ethnic group who ought to have had the least problems with written or spoken instructions, the British, had one of the lowest survival rates, while those Middle Eastern emigrants had one of the highest.
.